> Wormey, as usual you are confused. This is what I am suggesting could happen.
> The thing first condensed into a ball. Then, under intense gravitational > pressure, the conditions in the cente became such that a mini nuclear fusion > explosion occured, expanding and fusing the outside shell into a very strong > structure. So it became a hollow ball, still attracting more external matter.
> There are plenty of stable hollow balls around Wormey. Have a look in any > shop..
You sure as hell don't have a clue about scale, do you? Ever wonder why a Godzilla couldn't walk, let alone breath?
> The thing first condensed into a ball. Then, under intense gravitational > pressure, the conditions in the cente became such that a mini nuclear fusion > explosion occured, expanding and fusing the outside shell into a very strong > structure. So it became a hollow ball, still attracting more external matter.
Here's the scoop, Wilson... gas (mostly hydrogen) does collapse to form stars and fused hydrogen into helium while on the main sequence. Massive enough stars can have other fusion process than can result in some iron core* implosions. The iron core can never undergo a fission or fusion reaction.
*for main sequence stars that have at least ten solar masses.
Fusion of the iron core just can't happen! It's a dead end.
Gravitation is so strong that the cores collapse forming o white dwarf held up against further collapse by electron degeneracy pressure, o neutron stars held up against further collapse by neutron degeneracy pressure, o or not held up at all and collapse within the core's Schwarzschild radius.
In any of these cases, gravity is a big winner and leaves no place for a void.
"Sam Wormley" <sworml...@mchsi.com> wrote in message news:c9JIm.122779$la3.64726@attbi_s22... > Here's the scoop, Wilson... gas (mostly hydrogen) does collapse to form stars > and fused hydrogen into helium while on the main sequence. Massive enough > stars can have other fusion process than can result in some iron core* > implosions. The iron core can never undergo a fission or fusion reaction.
> *for main sequence stars that have at least ten solar masses.
> Fusion of the iron core just can't happen! It's a dead end.
> Gravitation is so strong that the cores collapse forming > o white dwarf held up against further collapse by electron degeneracy pressure, > o neutron stars held up against further collapse by neutron degeneracy pressure, > o or not held up at all and collapse within the core's Schwarzschild radius.
> In any of these cases, gravity is a big winner and leaves no place for a void.
> I can go into a lot more detail if you like.
That still doesn't explain the empty region between Wilson's and Guthball's ears.
>> Here's the scoop, Wilson... gas (mostly hydrogen) does collapse to form stars >> and fused hydrogen into helium while on the main sequence. Massive enough >> stars can have other fusion process than can result in some iron core* >> implosions. The iron core can never undergo a fission or fusion reaction.
>> *for main sequence stars that have at least ten solar masses.
>> Fusion of the iron core just can't happen! It's a dead end.
>> Gravitation is so strong that the cores collapse forming >> o white dwarf held up against further collapse by electron degeneracy pressure, >> o neutron stars held up against further collapse by neutron degeneracy pressure, >> o or not held up at all and collapse within the core's Schwarzschild radius.
>> In any of these cases, gravity is a big winner and leaves no place for a void.
>> I can go into a lot more detail if you like.
> That still doesn't explain the empty region between Wilson's and Guthball's > ears.
>"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message >news:c8a6f5loloo9tbl133mm0l2pndjb8mhei5@4ax.com... >> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 09:17:42 -0000, "Androcles" >> <Headmas...@Hogwarts.physics_p> >> wrote: >>>>>what >>>>>we >>>>>think we know about the universe.
>>>> A black hole is just a big neutron star or similar. where's the >>>> problem?.
>>>In Oz. Anything it doesn't understand it invents a quick solution to, >>>according to its faulty intuition. It's called a "Wilson".
>> Prove I'm wrong then.
>The fuckwit's fallacy: "Prove I'm wrong"... >Burden of proof is upon the claimant. >Bright green flying elephants lay their eggs in black holes. >Prove I'm wrong then. >The Easter Bunny lays chocolate eggs. >Prove I'm wrong then. >The Tooth Fairy buys children's milk teeth. >Prove I'm wrong then. >Time dilates as speed increases. >Prove Einstein wrong then. >Where's the problem? >The problem is in Oz, it's called an illogical Wilson.
Hahahahahahahaha! You'd never make a good suicide bomber.....
On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 23:24:56 GMT, Sam Wormley <sworml...@mchsi.com> wrote: >Henry Wilson DSc wrote:
>> The thing first condensed into a ball. Then, under intense gravitational >> pressure, the conditions in the cente became such that a mini nuclear fusion >> explosion occured, expanding and fusing the outside shell into a very strong >> structure. So it became a hollow ball, still attracting more external matter.
> Here's the scoop, Wilson... gas (mostly hydrogen) does collapse to form stars > and fused hydrogen into helium while on the main sequence. Massive enough > stars can have other fusion process than can result in some iron core* > implosions. The iron core can never undergo a fission or fusion reaction.
> *for main sequence stars that have at least ten solar masses.
> Fusion of the iron core just can't happen! It's a dead end.
Wormey, what exactly causes a SN to explode?
> Gravitation is so strong that the cores collapse forming > o white dwarf held up against further collapse by electron degeneracy pressure, > o neutron stars held up against further collapse by neutron degeneracy pressure, > o or not held up at all and collapse within the core's Schwarzschild radius.
> In any of these cases, gravity is a big winner and leaves no place for a void.
>>>> What are the required conditions for spinning matter to condense into a >>>> HOLLOW >>>> ball rather than a solid one?
>>> Perhaps you could tell us how you think neutron starts come >>> to exist in the first place, Henry!
>> Gravity.
>> It condensed lots of matter into a spinning ball...then a bloody big >> explosion >> in the middle blew out an enormous spherical cavity. It wasn't enough to >> blow >> the star completely apart though.
>Then the inside is padded and called a cell, the ideal habitat for a Wilson.
>>>>>>what >>>>>>we >>>>>>think we know about the universe.
>>>>> A black hole is just a big neutron star or similar. where's the >>>>> problem?.
>>>>In Oz. Anything it doesn't understand it invents a quick solution to, >>>>according to its faulty intuition. It's called a "Wilson".
>>> Prove I'm wrong then.
>>The fuckwit's fallacy: "Prove I'm wrong"... >>Burden of proof is upon the claimant. >>Bright green flying elephants lay their eggs in black holes. >>Prove I'm wrong then. >>The Easter Bunny lays chocolate eggs. >>Prove I'm wrong then. >>The Tooth Fairy buys children's milk teeth. >>Prove I'm wrong then. >>Time dilates as speed increases. >>Prove Einstein wrong then. >>Where's the problem? >>The problem is in Oz, it's called an illogical Wilson.
> Hahahahahahahaha! You'd never make a good suicide bomber.....
Right. And you'll never find a black hole... but if you do, look inside for broken eggshell, it'll prove my theory that the hatchlings have left.
> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 13:11:56 -0800 (PST), BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote: > >On Nov 3, 12:49 pm, Double-A <double...@hush.com> wrote: > >> On Nov 3, 12:36 pm, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > On Nov 3, 11:57 am, Double-A <double...@hush.com> wrote:
> >> > > On Nov 3, 10:52 am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > > On Nov 3, 10:11 am, Double-A <double...@hush.com> wrote:
> >> > > > > On Oct 29, 10:43 pm, _@Jeff_Relf.Seattle.inValid wrote:
> >> > > > > > Pressure accrues. > >> > > > > > The deeper you go the higher the pressure and temperature.
> >> > > > > > What could produce “ reduced pressure and/or lower density ” > >> > > > > > at the center of the earth ?
> >> > > > > At the center of the Earth it's like you are in a vice that has > >> > > > > tightened on you to terrific pressure. Only difference is that the > >> > > > > pressure is from all sides equally, so there is no direction for your > >> > > > > brains to squirt out!
> >> > > > > Double-A
> >> > > > However, at near zero gravity (say within a 1% volume of Earth as > >> > > > representing its inner most core where gravity is less than 0.1%) > >> > > > whereas the center most zone of dead center is actually zero or even > >> > > > reverse gravity (meaning you'd oscillate or vibrate within this final > >> > > > sphere), how can there be pressure?
> >> > > > ~ BG
> >> > > If your head were clamped in a vice that was tightening, what would > >> > > you care about gravity? Get the point?
> >> > > Double-A
> >> > At near zero gravity, where's all that pressure coming from?
> >> > How much does lead or any other element weigh at zero gravity?
> >> > ~ BG
> >> The pressure is coming from the mass on all sides of you that IS > >> feeling gravity and is all pushing inwards, each side attracting the > >> opposite side.
> >> Double-A
> >However, an eggshell would likely protect you, because the vast bulk > >of whatever is surrounding yourself is being pulled outwards unless > >you yourself represented more density than anything else (thus you'd > >be representing gravity).
> >If the core substance were that of hydrogen and helium?
> > ~ BG
> Earth is slowly rotating so centrifugal force is insufficiet to obercome > gratvity near the centre. But what about a very rapidly spinning neutron > star?
> It could easily be hollow.
> There is no gravity field inside homogeneous shell.
Only if that neutron star were spinning in all possible directions at the same time (atom like), as otherwise it would have to be near solid from its outermost shell to its core.
Contributors include shock wave bounce and a tremendous outpouring of neutrinos.
In the case of SN 1987A o total anti-neutrino energy 3 x 10^52 erg o total neutrino energy 2.5 x 10^53 erg o total neutrino luminosity 10^55 erg/s o average neutrino temperature 4 MeV or 10^10 K o number of neutrinos produced 10^58 neutrinos
o neutrino flux density at the earth 5 x 10^10 /cm^2
>"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message >news:71t7f5994tc392sdrnvtdpda6ej44klp7l@4ax.com... >> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 21:48:15 -0000, "Androcles" >> <Headmas...@Hogwarts.physics_p> >>>> <Headmas...@Hogwarts.physics_p> >>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>what >>>>>>>we >>>>>>>think we know about the universe.
>>>>>> A black hole is just a big neutron star or similar. where's the >>>>>> problem?.
>>>>>In Oz. Anything it doesn't understand it invents a quick solution to, >>>>>according to its faulty intuition. It's called a "Wilson".
>>>> Prove I'm wrong then.
>>>The fuckwit's fallacy: "Prove I'm wrong"... >>>Burden of proof is upon the claimant. >>>Bright green flying elephants lay their eggs in black holes. >>>Prove I'm wrong then. >>>The Easter Bunny lays chocolate eggs. >>>Prove I'm wrong then. >>>The Tooth Fairy buys children's milk teeth. >>>Prove I'm wrong then. >>>Time dilates as speed increases. >>>Prove Einstein wrong then. >>>Where's the problem? >>>The problem is in Oz, it's called an illogical Wilson.
>> Hahahahahahahaha! You'd never make a good suicide bomber.....
>Right. And you'll never find a black hole... but if you do, >look inside for broken eggshell, it'll prove my theory that >the hatchlings have left.
You know the funniest aspect of all this is that the idiots here lke Wormey think I'm serious....
On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 18:26:30 GMT, Sam Wormley <sworml...@mchsi.com> wrote: >Henry Wilson DSc wrote:
>> Wormey, what exactly causes a SN to explode?
> Contributors include shock wave bounce and a tremendous outpouring of > neutrinos.
> In the case of SN 1987A > o total anti-neutrino energy 3 x 10^52 erg > o total neutrino energy 2.5 x 10^53 erg > o total neutrino luminosity 10^55 erg/s > o average neutrino temperature 4 MeV or 10^10 K > o number of neutrinos produced 10^58 neutrinos
> o neutrino flux density at the earth 5 x 10^10 /cm^2
Which comes first, the neutrinos or the explosion?
On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 04:54:00 -0800 (PST), BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote: >On Nov 3, 2:18 pm, HW@..(Henry Wilson DSc). wrote: >> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 13:11:56 -0800 (PST), BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >On Nov 3, 12:49 pm, Double-A <double...@hush.com> wrote: >> >> On Nov 3, 12:36 pm, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > On Nov 3, 11:57 am, Double-A <double...@hush.com> wrote:
>> >> > > On Nov 3, 10:52 am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > > > On Nov 3, 10:11 am, Double-A <double...@hush.com> wrote:
>> >> > > > > On Oct 29, 10:43 pm, _@Jeff_Relf.Seattle.inValid wrote:
>> >> > > > > > Pressure accrues. >> >> > > > > > The deeper you go the higher the pressure and temperature.
>> >> > > > > > What could produce “ reduced pressure and/or lower density ” >> >> > > > > > at the center of the earth ?
>> >> > > > > At the center of the Earth it's like you are in a vice that has >> >> > > > > tightened on you to terrific pressure. Only difference is that the >> >> > > > > pressure is from all sides equally, so there is no direction for your >> >> > > > > brains to squirt out!
>> >> > > > > Double-A
>> >> > > > However, at near zero gravity (say within a 1% volume of Earth as >> >> > > > representing its inner most core where gravity is less than 0.1%) >> >> > > > whereas the center most zone of dead center is actually zero or even >> >> > > > reverse gravity (meaning you'd oscillate or vibrate within this final >> >> > > > sphere), how can there be pressure?
>> >> > > > ~ BG
>> >> > > If your head were clamped in a vice that was tightening, what would >> >> > > you care about gravity? Get the point?
>> >> > > Double-A
>> >> > At near zero gravity, where's all that pressure coming from?
>> >> > How much does lead or any other element weigh at zero gravity?
>> >> > ~ BG
>> >> The pressure is coming from the mass on all sides of you that IS >> >> feeling gravity and is all pushing inwards, each side attracting the >> >> opposite side.
>> >> Double-A
>> >However, an eggshell would likely protect you, because the vast bulk >> >of whatever is surrounding yourself is being pulled outwards unless >> >you yourself represented more density than anything else (thus you'd >> >be representing gravity).
>> >If the core substance were that of hydrogen and helium?
>> > ~ BG
>> Earth is slowly rotating so centrifugal force is insufficiet to obercome >> gratvity near the centre. But what about a very rapidly spinning neutron >> star?
>> It could easily be hollow.
>> There is no gravity field inside homogeneous shell.
>Only if that neutron star were spinning in all possible directions at >the same time (atom like), as otherwise it would have to be near solid >from its outermost shell to its core.
>>>>>>>>what >>>>>>>>we >>>>>>>>think we know about the universe.
>>>>>>> A black hole is just a big neutron star or similar. where's the >>>>>>> problem?.
>>>>>>In Oz. Anything it doesn't understand it invents a quick solution to, >>>>>>according to its faulty intuition. It's called a "Wilson".
>>>>> Prove I'm wrong then.
>>>>The fuckwit's fallacy: "Prove I'm wrong"... >>>>Burden of proof is upon the claimant. >>>>Bright green flying elephants lay their eggs in black holes. >>>>Prove I'm wrong then. >>>>The Easter Bunny lays chocolate eggs. >>>>Prove I'm wrong then. >>>>The Tooth Fairy buys children's milk teeth. >>>>Prove I'm wrong then. >>>>Time dilates as speed increases. >>>>Prove Einstein wrong then. >>>>Where's the problem? >>>>The problem is in Oz, it's called an illogical Wilson.
>>> Hahahahahahahaha! You'd never make a good suicide bomber.....
>>Right. And you'll never find a black hole... but if you do, >>look inside for broken eggshell, it'll prove my theory that >>the hatchlings have left.
> You know the funniest aspect of all this is that the idiots here lke > Wormey > think I'm serious....
Henry Wilson DSc wrote: > On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 18:26:30 GMT, Sam Wormley <sworml...@mchsi.com> wrote:
>> Henry Wilson DSc wrote:
>>> Wormey, what exactly causes a SN to explode? >> Contributors include shock wave bounce and a tremendous outpouring of >> neutrinos.
>> In the case of SN 1987A >> o total anti-neutrino energy 3 x 10^52 erg >> o total neutrino energy 2.5 x 10^53 erg >> o total neutrino luminosity 10^55 erg/s >> o average neutrino temperature 4 MeV or 10^10 K >> o number of neutrinos produced 10^58 neutrinos
>> o neutrino flux density at the earth 5 x 10^10 /cm^2
> Which comes first, the neutrinos or the explosion?
Henry Wilson DSc wrote: > On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 14:49:32 -0500, "HVAC" <harlowcampb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> "Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message >> news:j7t7f5l8mp9rhiv6us7g9tu2o5vu210r6h@4ax.com... >>> Wormey, what exactly causes a SN to explode? >> The short answer is gravity. If you want I can >> go further into the details.
> We're already far beyond 'gravity', dopey.
Actually not... the energy source of a supernova is gravitational collapse, Henri.
Sam Wormley wrote: > Henry Wilson DSc wrote: >> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 14:49:32 -0500, "HVAC" <harlowcampb...@gmail.com> >> wrote:
>>> "Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message >>> news:j7t7f5l8mp9rhiv6us7g9tu2o5vu210r6h@4ax.com... >>>> Wormey, what exactly causes a SN to explode? >>> The short answer is gravity. If you want I can >>> go further into the details.
>> We're already far beyond 'gravity', dopey.
> Actually not... the energy source of a supernova is gravitational > collapse, Henri.
What would be the temperature of a new neutron star?
> On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 18:26:30 GMT, Sam Wormley <sworml...@mchsi.com> wrote:
>>Henry Wilson DSc wrote:
>>> Wormey, what exactly causes a SN to explode?
>> Contributors include shock wave bounce and a tremendous outpouring of >> neutrinos.
>> In the case of SN 1987A >> o total anti-neutrino energy 3 x 10^52 erg >> o total neutrino energy 2.5 x 10^53 erg >> o total neutrino luminosity 10^55 erg/s >> o average neutrino temperature 4 MeV or 10^10 K >> o number of neutrinos produced 10^58 neutrinos
>> o neutrino flux density at the earth 5 x 10^10 /cm^2
> Which comes first, the neutrinos or the explosion?
>Sam Wormley wrote: >> Henry Wilson DSc wrote: >>> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 14:49:32 -0500, "HVAC" <harlowcampb...@gmail.com> >>> wrote:
>>>> "Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message >>>> news:j7t7f5l8mp9rhiv6us7g9tu2o5vu210r6h@4ax.com... >>>>> Wormey, what exactly causes a SN to explode? >>>> The short answer is gravity. If you want I can >>>> go further into the details.
>>> We're already far beyond 'gravity', dopey.
>> Actually not... the energy source of a supernova is gravitational >> collapse, Henri.
>What would be the temperature of a new neutron star?
Ever heard of Wikipedia? Every question asked on this thread could have been answered there within a minute.
|
